If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
"Bernard Farquart" > wrote in message news:9rnFd.12985$F97.3694@trnddc06... > > "jaybird" > wrote in message > ... >> >> "Bernard Farquart" > wrote in message >> news:l4UEd.11191$ig7.6580@trnddc04... >>> >>> "jaybird" > wrote in message >>> ... >>>> >>>> Or you should just quit speeding. ) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> --- >>>> jaybird >>> >>> >>> Jaybird, I an curious. Do you think that speeding is rare? >> >> I was mainly poking fun of Alex's nit-picking over a fraction of an inch >> of tire height. If a person is speeding, they're speeding no matter how >> many rabbits you can pull out of your hat in front of the judge. >> >> In my experience speeding in excess is rare. People going about 5 over >> the limit is not because that's what people think they can get away with. >> > > Or they feel perfectly safe doing so due to years of experience > > >>> >>> If you do not, why is that? Is it possible that speed limits are >>> not properly set, or is it that most (close to all) drivers are >>> miscreant lawbreakers with no regard for public good? >> >> I don't think it's either one. I think it's inherent in human nature to >> push limits. We see it everyday in everything we do. I've never been >> opposed to good drivers being allowed to drive at their skill level, but >> then I'm not the one who makes the laws. Unfortunately we're stuck with >> a lot of stupid people we have to compete with on the road. > > Thank you for a reasonable response, I figured you had it in you. It's always been there. > >> >>> >>> Really, I am serious since this is the basis for most of the >>> interaction between you and the regulars here. >>> What is your perspective? >> >> While I know that it isn't a popular opinion in here, I truly think that >> speed plays an important factor in vehicle collisions. I also think that >> people will push limits to the point they think they can get away with >> it. It is true that speed, in itself with no other factors present, does >> not kill. However, there are an infinite number of factors involved >> while driving a vehicle on our roadways. >> > > Speed obviously makes an accident *worse* but the error that causes the > accident is not going to be the speed, it is a seperate event. > > Wouldn't it be cool if we could focus our enforcement toward > weeding the "stupid people" off the road? It would be very cool. I'd be all for it. -- --- jaybird --- I am not the cause of your problems. My actions are the result of your actions. Your life is not my fault. |
Ads |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Jay,
Apparently, you're an officer yourself? Just curious. There're people that deliberately speed. Then there're some that inadverdently speed. And then there're some who do speed (at least when they get the ticket; see last paragraph for more) When one gets a ticket, he's always at fault? I've nothing against law enforcement officers. Frankly, I just wish they show up when I was tailgated (within inches) on a freeway and take the idiot behind me away. Or when I was cut off (within inches) by someone who doesn't even bother to signal, etc. Anyhow, there're inevitably bad apples on a big tree. What if someone accused is really innocent? And it's the "bad" cop that is at fault. Do you see such a scenario possible? How do you say the "victim" should defend himeself?? It seems to me, given all the responses I got here, that the justice system almost always sides with the cops. Naturally, it's really easy for a cop to "get away"! That's what I see. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Jay,
Apparently, you're an officer yourself? Just curious. There're people that deliberately speed. Then there're some that inadverdently speed. And then there're some who do speed (at least when they get the ticket; see last paragraph for more) When one gets a ticket, he's always at fault? I've nothing against law enforcement officers. Frankly, I just wish they show up when I was tailgated (within inches) on a freeway and take the idiot behind me away. Or when I was cut off (within inches) by someone who doesn't even bother to signal, etc. Anyhow, there're inevitably bad apples on a big tree. What if someone accused is really innocent? And it's the "bad" cop that is at fault. Do you see such a scenario possible? How do you say the "victim" should defend himeself?? It seems to me, given all the responses I got here, that the justice system almost always sides with the cops. Naturally, it's really easy for a cop to "get away"! That's what I see. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message oups.com... > Jay, > > Apparently, you're an officer yourself? Just curious. There're people > that deliberately speed. Then there're some that inadverdently speed. > And then there're some who do speed (at least when they get the ticket; > see last paragraph for more) When one gets a ticket, he's always at > fault? > > I've nothing against law enforcement officers. Frankly, I just wish > they show up when I was tailgated (within inches) on a freeway and take > the idiot behind me away. Or when I was cut off (within inches) by > someone > who doesn't even bother to signal, etc. > > Anyhow, there're inevitably bad apples on a big tree. What if someone > accused is really innocent? And it's the "bad" cop that is at fault. > Do > you see such a scenario possible? How do you say the "victim" should > defend himeself?? > > It seems to me, given all the responses I got here, that the justice > system > almost always sides with the cops. Naturally, it's really easy for a > cop > to "get away"! That's what I see. I don't see much use in ticketing somebody for a violation that never happened, but yes it's possible. If a person honestly did not break the law then they should definitely stand up and fight it. It is possible for that to happen, but those kids of cops don't last very long. If they're lying on something like this then they don't have a problem lying in other areas of their work and they're usually found out quite soon. The judges know which cops are honest and dishonest too. -- --- jaybird --- I am not the cause of your problems. My actions are the result of your actions. Your life is not my fault. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message oups.com... > Jay, > > Apparently, you're an officer yourself? Just curious. There're people > that deliberately speed. Then there're some that inadverdently speed. > And then there're some who do speed (at least when they get the ticket; > see last paragraph for more) When one gets a ticket, he's always at > fault? > > I've nothing against law enforcement officers. Frankly, I just wish > they show up when I was tailgated (within inches) on a freeway and take > the idiot behind me away. Or when I was cut off (within inches) by > someone > who doesn't even bother to signal, etc. > > Anyhow, there're inevitably bad apples on a big tree. What if someone > accused is really innocent? And it's the "bad" cop that is at fault. > Do > you see such a scenario possible? How do you say the "victim" should > defend himeself?? > > It seems to me, given all the responses I got here, that the justice > system > almost always sides with the cops. Naturally, it's really easy for a > cop > to "get away"! That's what I see. I don't see much use in ticketing somebody for a violation that never happened, but yes it's possible. If a person honestly did not break the law then they should definitely stand up and fight it. It is possible for that to happen, but those kids of cops don't last very long. If they're lying on something like this then they don't have a problem lying in other areas of their work and they're usually found out quite soon. The judges know which cops are honest and dishonest too. -- --- jaybird --- I am not the cause of your problems. My actions are the result of your actions. Your life is not my fault. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
jaybird wrote:
> I don't see much use in ticketing somebody for a violation that never > happened, but yes it's possible. If a person honestly did not break the law > then they should definitely stand up and fight it. Good that at least your mind is opened enough to allow this as a possibility. But what chance does an average person have in winning the fight, given the pro-cop attitude of judges? In the case of "your words against mine", the cops always come out ahead. After all, they give out a few tickets each day, while the average Joe might not get a ticket once every full moon. This means they're better prepared to give supporting "verdicts" and "evidence". When I was stopped and given a ticket, I didn't even know that I could request the "county seat" which could be advantageous to me in some cases. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
jaybird wrote:
> I don't see much use in ticketing somebody for a violation that never > happened, but yes it's possible. If a person honestly did not break the law > then they should definitely stand up and fight it. Good that at least your mind is opened enough to allow this as a possibility. But what chance does an average person have in winning the fight, given the pro-cop attitude of judges? In the case of "your words against mine", the cops always come out ahead. After all, they give out a few tickets each day, while the average Joe might not get a ticket once every full moon. This means they're better prepared to give supporting "verdicts" and "evidence". When I was stopped and given a ticket, I didn't even know that I could request the "county seat" which could be advantageous to me in some cases. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
And just stumbled on an article about Traffic Court Justice:
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/me...c-ct-9749.html "....More important, a Presiding Judge in San Jose Municipal Court admits that traffic court commissioners do not tell defendant drivers the whole truth about the law in an effort to coerce guilty pleas." "....I observed several instances of commissioners in San Jose Traffic Court doing just that: helping the police officers along with softball questions rather than probing hard to get at the truth. It is hardly likely that a judge, in such a situation, can then turn around and be perfectly fair in making a decision on the case. And in fact, one California appellate judge, in dissent in the Daggett case, wrote that this situation leads to "the inescapable conclusion that the court is, or at least appears to be, both the prosecutor and the court, rather than being impartial." |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
And just stumbled on an article about Traffic Court Justice:
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/me...c-ct-9749.html "....More important, a Presiding Judge in San Jose Municipal Court admits that traffic court commissioners do not tell defendant drivers the whole truth about the law in an effort to coerce guilty pleas." "....I observed several instances of commissioners in San Jose Traffic Court doing just that: helping the police officers along with softball questions rather than probing hard to get at the truth. It is hardly likely that a judge, in such a situation, can then turn around and be perfectly fair in making a decision on the case. And in fact, one California appellate judge, in dissent in the Daggett case, wrote that this situation leads to "the inescapable conclusion that the court is, or at least appears to be, both the prosecutor and the court, rather than being impartial." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Where to get Official Speed Limit Info | [email protected] | Driving | 40 | January 3rd 05 07:10 AM |
WA - 1st Speeding Ticket - HELP! | redindian | Driving | 8 | December 7th 04 06:13 AM |
WA - 1st Speeding Ticket - HELP!! | redindian | Driving | 12 | December 6th 04 11:56 PM |
WA - 1st Speeding Ticket - HELP! | redindian | Driving | 0 | December 6th 04 06:19 PM |